asdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net
| ...
I'm disappointed that google is admitting, by their bidding behavior, that they never wanted this spectrum. I was hoping maybe there was an agenda to actually put serious money into getting an alternative network built out. I always felt this was just wishful thinking on my part but we all need to hope.
I don't think Karl, or most of the people here, would have preferred to have the incumbents pick up this sprectrum at lower cost with no rules imposed. I agree with Karl that the rules will inevitably be played around with but what was the alternative in the present political climate?
We aren't sure yet what the result of the rules will be. I think most of us would agree however that having the rules, however imperfect, is probably better than having no rules. If google did drive up the price of the spectrum it also probably reduced the inclination to buy and sit on the spectrum. The more costly it becomes the more incentive the buyer has to make sure that they actually intend to use it to generate revenue and not simply to keep someone else from using it.
I think it is likely that it turned out better than it would have if google hadn't participated. |
